Jump to content
The Education Forum

Is the "Lansdale Hypothesis" of the JFK Assassination the Real Deal?


Recommended Posts

I went back and re-read the thread, and it appears I already commented on it. But to add to that, Lansdale was obviously a fascinating character, and Prouty, despite some obvious misguided speculations, has provided crucial info about that era.

But we need more info about Lansdale from someone besides Prouty to bring the subject out of the realm of speculation.

Judging by the gif posted last week, we now have moving footage of the man in DP claimed to be Lansdale; has that moved the needle at all on an identification?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 9/10/2021 at 6:58 PM, W. Niederhut said:

Try reading Prouty's books, Greg, before posting more erroneous opinions about the man.  You have, apparently, been drinking the McAdams internet kool aid targeting Prouty as a whistleblower.

Prouty's primary source historical observations about events happening with the Joint Chiefs, Vietnam, Lansdale, and the CIA in the 1950s and during JFK's administration haven't been "discredited" at all.

Nor has Prouty's "Lansdale Hypothesis."

I must have missed your imaginary refutation of Prouty's hypothesis.

The fact that Helms and Harvey had personality conflicts with Lansdale running Operation Mongoose doesn't prove that Lansdale was not involved in the Dallas op.   Does it?  You seem to be overlooking the fact that both Helms and Lansdale were favorites of their old Company boss, Allen Dulles.

 

6 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Matt,

    That mistake about Joannides and the ARRB transcript was already pointed out by Greg What's-His-Face (above.)

    It's a straw man.

     Now, pray tell us what Prouty's ARRB transcript has to do with the "Lansdale Hypothesis" outlined in Prouty's letter to Jim Garrison.   I'd love to hear your thoughts about the actual subject of this thread.

Boy this is rich.. I provide documentation that the CIA rank and file did not have this fairytale relationship that you espouse and you continue to push a letter to Jim Garrison prior to the ARRB interview with Prouty?  Really?? Wow… talk about drinking the koolaid.   

Your  “Strawman”  statement doesn’t hold water Mr. W.   YOU were the one that spewed that crappola only to back pedal from it when I called you out for your it.  Who do you think you are fooling around here?

 By the way, my name is Greg Kooyman..  I guess this is what YOU stoop to when you have nothing of substance to say..

To be clear, I don’t hide behind an abbreviation for a first name like you do.  What are you afraid of???    

Too bad that a Harvard Medical School Education didn’t provide you with at least a 3rd grade education in common sense.

The ARRB interview with Fletcher Prouty was his opportunity to “put up or shut up” and he failed to provide any proof to ANY of his allegations, least of which was the Lansdale Letter that you have coined.😒  Your  responses on this thread have provided zero documentation to back up your wild theories.

Or, maybe you believe the ARRB was complicit in the conspiracy by dismissing Fletcher Prouty’s claims?  

What’s next W??  Proclaiming that Dulles was the person who was responsible for Lansdale’s promotion to General?  
 

I can patiently wait for your response… 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg,

I'll try one final time to engage you in an intellectually honest debate about Prouty and Lansdale.  As for the ad hominem stuff, it's not my thing.

(Incidentally, I use the moniker "W" here instead of "William" because my full name didn't fit in the box when I registered to join the Education Forum.  That has been a life long problem, going back to my elementary school years.)

IMO, your focus on that ARRB Prouty transcript is an old John McAdams propaganda technique to discredit Prouty's whistle blowing on the JFK assassination.  It's a lawyer's trick based on a logical fallacy -- i.e., that discrediting minor, peripheral details in someone's testimony implies that everything else the witness or whistle blower says is, some how, also discredited. 

And, in Prouty's case, you don't even seem to know what he said about Lansdale, the CIA, Vietnam, and the plot to assassinate JFK.  You have, apparently, never read The Secret Team, or The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate JFK.  And yet, you repeatedly presume to impugn Prouty's reputation, calling him an inventor of "fables."   Why?

As for your evidence, I already posted a detailed response to your CIA files about Prouty.   You never responded to my rebuttals.

To reiterate, your two CIA transcripts confirmed that Lansdale was a decorated, highly regarded CIA official in the Phillippines and at Saigon Station-- as Prouty described in detail.

They also indicated that Helms and Harvey resented Lansdale's management of Operation Mongoose in 1962, and viewed him as inimical to CIA interests by October of 1963, (after JFK put the kibosh on anti-Castro black ops and  Harvey was shipped off to Rome.)

But your CIA files say nothing about Lansdale's relationship in 1963 with his old Company boss Allen Dulles, correct?

If Dulles, Cabell, and Angleton were secretly running the JFK assassination op, how do you know that weren't using their black ops man Ed Lansdale-- as Prouty believed?

Explain.

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Greg,

I'll try one final time to engage you in an intellectually honest debate about Prouty and Lansdale.  As for the ad hominem stuff, it's not my thing.

(Incidentally, I use the moniker "W" here instead of "William" because my full name didn't fit in the box when I registered to join the Education Forum.  That has been a life long problem, going back to my elementary school years.)

IMO, your focus on that ARRB Prouty transcript is an old John McAdams propaganda technique to discredit Prouty's whistle blowing on the JFK assassination.  It's a lawyer's trick based on a logical fallacy -- i.e., that discrediting minor, peripheral details in someone's testimony implies that everything else the witness or whistle blower says is, some how, also discredited. 

And, in Prouty's case, you don't even seem to know what he said about Lansdale, the CIA, Vietnam, and the plot to assassinate JFK.  You have, apparently, never read The Secret Team, or The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate JFK.  And yet, you repeatedly presume to impugn Prouty's reputation, calling him an inventor of "fables."   Why?

As for your evidence, I already posted a detailed response to your CIA files about Prouty.   You never responded to my rebuttals.

To reiterate, your two CIA transcripts confirmed that Lansdale was a decorated, highly regarded CIA official in the Phillippines and at Saigon Station-- as Prouty described in detail.

They also indicated that Helms and Harvey resented Lansdale's management of Operation Mongoose in 1962, and viewed him as inimical to CIA interests by October of 1963, (after JFK put the kibosh on anti-Castro black ops and  Harvey was shipped off to Rome.)

But your CIA files say nothing about Lansdale's relationship in 1963 with his old Company boss Allen Dulles, correct?

If Dulles, Cabell, and Angleton were secretly running the JFK assassination op, how do you know that weren't using their black ops man Ed Lansdale-- as Prouty believed?

Explain.

Glad to see you come clean William.  Regarding the ongoing problem since childhood, ever thought about talking with a psychiatrist?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Glad to see you come clean William.  Regarding the ongoing problem since childhood, ever thought about talking with a psychiatrist?  

LOL.  Yes, it was quite traumatic to try to write my name in those little boxes on the standardized test forms only to find out that it didn't fit... 🤥

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, but here is my point:

If one posits LHO participated in or alone perpetrated the shooting on 11/22, participants on this blog will shred the abundant circumstantial evidence that he was involved. 

We reason that no one saw LHO on the stairs down from the Sixth Floor in the aftermath of the shooting, ergo LHO is innocent and so on.  

We are to believe that LHO is a totally innocent patsy (although a CIA or military-intel asset) who draws a weapon upon being accosted by officers at the Texas Theater.

(My own take is LHO willingly participated in a false flag fake assassination attempt, but others piggybacked on the op and made it real. My take is speculative, but fits the facts neatly). 

But then we flip, and if Lansdale or Dulles had a meeting somewhere, or were somewhere on an organizational chart, or were unlikable characters with sordid histories, then they must be guilty.  Curtis E. LeMay (a loathsome sort) was at a retreat in Canada, ergo he planned that as a diversion. If he had been at HQ, we would say that proves he had advance knowledge. Angleton hid and destroyed papers, and so he is convicted. 

All of the aforementioned and many others have records that are lamentable, to put it mildly. All could have participated in the post-JFKA cover-up, and probably did. We have concrete evidence the CIA lied to the WC and the HSCA.

I posit someone inside the CIA worked levers to have Ruby do what he did. 

But who actually ordered the hit on JFK? Very speculative. Larry Hancock and John Newman may be getting somewhere. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Benjamin Cole
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/12/2021 at 6:24 PM, Greg Kooyman said:

 

Boy this is rich.. I provide documentation that the CIA rank and file did not have this fairytale relationship that you espouse and you continue to push a letter to Jim Garrison prior to the ARRB interview with Prouty?  Really?? Wow… talk about drinking the koolaid.   

Your  “Strawman”  statement doesn’t hold water Mr. W.   YOU were the one that spewed that crappola only to back pedal from it when I called you out for your it.  Who do you think you are fooling around here?

 By the way, my name is Greg Kooyman..  I guess this is what YOU stoop to when you have nothing of substance to say..

To be clear, I don’t hide behind an abbreviation for a first name like you do.  What are you afraid of???    

Too bad that a Harvard Medical School Education didn’t provide you with at least a 3rd grade education in common sense.

The ARRB interview with Fletcher Prouty was his opportunity to “put up or shut up” and he failed to provide any proof to ANY of his allegations, least of which was the Lansdale Letter that you have coined.😒  Your  responses on this thread have provided zero documentation to back up your wild theories.

Or, maybe you believe the ARRB was complicit in the conspiracy by dismissing Fletcher Prouty’s claims?  

What’s next W??  Proclaiming that Dulles was the person who was responsible for Lansdale’s promotion to General?  
 

I can patiently wait for your response… 

 

 

Regarding Dulles was the person responsible for Lansdale's promotion to General?  That's what I've read.  I don't recall where or the documentation for sure.  Likely some from David Talbot's Devil's Chessboard, and, I believe it's been discussed here on the forum before.  Dulles during his assentation from the OSS to the Director of the CIA became fond of Lansdale's philosophy and methods in the Philippines and elsewhere.  Then the story of Le May visiting Dulles office and while waiting on him searching his office, for a cigar, and Dulles not seeming to care when told.  They reputedly exchanged Christmas cards.  Supposedly Dulles petitioned Le May for Lansdale's  generalship to maximize his usefulness.  I believe there are more details if you dig around.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Regarding Dulles was the person responsible for Lansdale's promotion to General?  That's what I've read.  I don't recall where or the documentation for sure.  Likely some from David Talbot's Devil's Chessboard, and, I believe it's been discussed here on the forum before.  Dulles during his assentation from the OSS to the Director of the CIA became fond of Lansdale's philosophy and methods in the Philippines and elsewhere.  Then the story of Le May visiting Dulles office and while waiting on him searching his office, for a cigar, and Dulles not seeming to care when told.  They reputedly exchanged Christmas cards.  Supposedly Dulles petitioned Le May for Lansdale's  generalship to maximize his usefulness.  I believe there are more details if you dig around.   

Ron,

 I am not sure where you read that either, but here’s a link from the JFK Library below with an oral history from Roswell Gilpatric that should clear this up..

https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKOH/Gilpatric%2C Roswell L/JFKOH-RLG-01/JFKOH-RLG-01

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/12/2021 at 8:44 PM, W. Niederhut said:

Greg,

I'll try one final time to engage you in an intellectually honest debate about Prouty and Lansdale.  As for the ad hominem stuff, it's not my thing.

(Incidentally, I use the moniker "W" here instead of "William" because my full name didn't fit in the box when I registered to join the Education Forum.  That has been a life long problem, going back to my elementary school years.)

IMO, your focus on that ARRB Prouty transcript is an old John McAdams propaganda technique to discredit Prouty's whistle blowing on the JFK assassination.  It's a lawyer's trick based on a logical fallacy -- i.e., that discrediting minor, peripheral details in someone's testimony implies that everything else the witness or whistle blower says is, some how, also discredited. 

And, in Prouty's case, you don't even seem to know what he said about Lansdale, the CIA, Vietnam, and the plot to assassinate JFK.  You have, apparently, never read The Secret Team, or The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate JFK.  And yet, you repeatedly presume to impugn Prouty's reputation, calling him an inventor of "fables."   Why?

As for your evidence, I already posted a detailed response to your CIA files about Prouty.   You never responded to my rebuttals.

To reiterate, your two CIA transcripts confirmed that Lansdale was a decorated, highly regarded CIA official in the Phillippines and at Saigon Station-- as Prouty described in detail.

They also indicated that Helms and Harvey resented Lansdale's management of Operation Mongoose in 1962, and viewed him as inimical to CIA interests by October of 1963, (after JFK put the kibosh on anti-Castro black ops and  Harvey was shipped off to Rome.)

But your CIA files say nothing about Lansdale's relationship in 1963 with his old Company boss Allen Dulles, correct?

If Dulles, Cabell, and Angleton were secretly running the JFK assassination op, how do you know that weren't using their black ops man Ed Lansdale-- as Prouty believed?

Explain.

How do I know that “ If Dulles,Cabell, and Angleton were secretly running the JFK assassination op, how do I know that (they) weren’t using their black ops man Ed Lansdale??”

Ummm.. for the SAME reason that I don’t believe that Dean Martin, Ruth Buzzy, Sammy Davis Jr.,and Frank Sinatra didn’t all pile in to a  300hp Volkswagen Clown Car and escort Lee Harvey Oswald down to Mexico City for a fun filled vacation…😁

I can’t believe that you seriously asked me to prove a negative... 😒 

Now, on to your other assertions.. If I were in to the wild speculation game such as you are, I would suppose that the lack of Dulles’s man-love for Lansdale left unaccounted for by George McManus was that there wasn’t any.😒

You keep asking me why I have impugned poor Fletcher Prouty’s reputation by calling his allegations “fables” without have read his book?

Answer: my time is too precious to waste it on a book whose opinions and allegations about the CIA have yet to be proven.. least of all by you.  
 

My time is better is spent on reading much more insightful research by authors such as John Newman, Larry Hancock, and Bill Simpich just to name a few.  🙂

I would like to move on from this debate with you as it is crystal clear to me that neither of us are going to change each other’s opinion regarding ole Fletch..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Greg Kooyman said:

Ron,

 I am not sure where you read that either, but here’s a link from the JFK Library below with an oral history from Roswell Gilpatric that should clear this up..

https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKOH/Gilpatric%2C Roswell L/JFKOH-RLG-01/JFKOH-RLG-01

Help me out - how is this document relevant? 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm posting some educational links for Greg Kooyman and others who have never read Prouty's books, and/or have been duped by the prevalent disinformation about Prouty on-line (including Wikipedia.)

Proutypedia

http://proutypedia.com/wiki/Main_Page

Proutypedia was started in early 2014. It is owned by Len Osanic, who conducted a series of interviews with Col. L. Fletcher Prouty in the 1990s. Together with Prouty, Osanic created prouty.org, Prouty's official website, which Osanic still maintains.

Reasons for Creation

A high-level Pentagon official in the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations, Colonel L. Flether Prouty came under fire in the 1970s for his voicing his suspicions that elements inside the United States Government were responsible for the death of John F. Kennedy and not Lee Harvey Oswald. As a result, Prouty was attacked by some as a ‘crackpot’[1], a judgment seemingly at odds with a distinguished career at the highest levels of the Pentagon. While associates such as Oliver Stone[2] defended Prouty in the 1990s when controversy again raged around the Kennedy assassination, saying that Prouty’s critics were involved in character assassination and attack journalism, attempts to marginalize Prouty and to minimize his credibility continued throughout the 1990s until the time of his death in 2001, when weak connections to an anti-semitic group were played up in the mainstream press in Prouty’s obituary - even though it was conceded that “Prouty himself never espoused such beliefs.”[1]

On Wikipedia, the effort to marginalize Prouty continues today. Prouty’s biographical entry has been the site of a ten-year edit war, as result of which mention of Prouty’s own official website has been blocked from Wikipedia. Prouty’s entry on Wikipedia has been used at various times to present him in as unfavorable a light as possible using a set of smears and insinuations to confuse and frighten readers unfamiliar with Prouty's work.

Far from being a ‘crackpot’, Prouty was in fact a decent, upright man who after his retirement shared his extensive first-hand experience and inside knowledge about clandestine operations during the Cold War with any who would listen. Proutypedia has been created as a resource for those interested in the life and views of Colonel Prouty as well as various claims made about him. Prouty will be of special interest to scholars of twentieth-century American history as a high Pentagon official who candidly discussed the operations of power in government behind the official facade, particularly when they assumed the form of clandestine operations.

References

  1. ^ Jump up to: a b Theguardian.com "US officer obsessed by the conspiracy theory of President Kennedy's assassination" June 21, 2001
  2. Jump up ^ Esquire Magazine "Esquire Letter: Stone Shoots Back" December 1991

External links

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually for my money this one gives the most in depth insight into Prouty's own direct experiences and view into how SACSA and the Joint Chiefs actually supported special operations:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/353644280879?chn=ps&_trkparms=ispr%3D1&amdata=enc%3A14MhaS4I4Q0OY8lprYDzvoQ65&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-117182-37290-0&mkcid=2&itemid=353644280879&targetid=1262843335329&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=9026216&poi=&campaignid=12519034798&mkgroupid=121028924334&rlsatarget=pla-1262843335329&abcId=9300518&merchantid=191373216&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI3LTuw9v_8gIVCbjICh1EgwO2EAQYAiABEgKydvD_BwE

also:

http://www.prouty.org/ratville.html

A little pricey now its true, but I for one learned the most from it - and it was a bit cheaper when I first got it...grin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Help me out - how is this document relevant? 
 

 

Ron was wondering where he had read that Dulles was responsible for getting Ed Lansdale his promotion to General. I simply provided a link to show Dulles had nothing to do with it. I guess that’s the relevance Paul.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Greg Kooyman said:

Ron was wondering where he had read that Dulles was responsible for getting Ed Lansdale his promotion to General. I simply provided a link to show Dulles had nothing to do with it. I guess that’s the relevance Paul.  

It ain’t easy to find. Page number? 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...